Why wouldn't it be a competitor to FoCal just because it's not fully automated? Seems that the two solutions are doing much the same thing. One is more automated than the other so it then becomes the choice of the customer which approach they prefer. Based on what I've seen here on LuLa wrt FoCal and some Nikon bodies, the process isn't fully automated anyway because Nikon doesn't allow full access to the programming of the camera through its SDK so users have to manually adjust the focus tune settings anyway when using FoCal.

Why wouldn't it be a competitor to FoCal just because it's not fully automated?

That's exactly the reason.From what I've read FoCal takes all the drudgery out of setting MFA.If you're going to have to manually shoot loads of shots at different settings, it's not that much more trouble to wade through the images yourself to find the best settings.

If you already have a LensAlign Mark II (maybe the earlier versions as well) you can get a $10.00 discount at least for the first ten days.There is also a free ten day try it before you buy it test drive period.

I plunged ahead with a purchase ( it was only USD $19.95 as I have an LA Mk. II) and will try it out tomorrow.

If you already have a LensAlign Mark II (maybe the earlier versions as well) you can get a $10.00 discount at least for the first ten days.There is also a free ten day try it before you buy it test drive period.

I plunged ahead with a purchase ( it was only USD $19.95 as I have an LA Mk. II) and will try it out tomorrow.

It should be a hit, its pretty much an exacy copy of FoCal running in manual mode from the description and screenshots. The big upside, $80 cheaper!

FocusTune is indeed cheaper if one does not have to buy LensAlign. The Tapes web site does state that FocusTune can be used with a user printed target but implies that better results can be obtained with LensAlign. Can anyone elaborate?

FocusTune is indeed cheaper if one does not have to buy LensAlign. The Tapes web site does state that FocusTune can be used with a user printed target but implies that better results can be obtained with LensAlign. Can anyone elaborate?

Hi Bill,

I suppose that any high edge contrast target will do, but maybe Michael Tapes will chime in whether there are specific target requirements.

Well, as noted with, at least, some Nikon bodies it appears the process is not fully automated anyway.

It isn't but the only thing you need to do is change the fine tune setting when it prompts you and set the final value when the test in complete.

FoCal is great because it is mostly idiot-proof, you just set it going and follow the instructions. It will tell you if the target is skewed or at the wrong distance, eliminate statistically insignificant results, repeat more when results are inconsistent, warn you if the light level changes etc. which is a big part of the hassle with fine tuning.

I wish manufactures would profile their bodies and lenses before they leave the factory and code them in the firmware so they will play nicely so all this stuff was not required.

It's perfectly excusable if you want affordable cameras.I'd guess that more than 95% of users never bother using MFA as the standards of manufacture are so high the tiny inaccuracies of AF performance aren't noticeable.

I still wonder when the camera makers will build this into the body and truly automate it. If I put the camera on a tripod and aim it at an appropriate target, the camera can flip between phase and contrast as often as it wants (without my hands touching the camera and introducting vibration!) and calibrate itself. It can tell me if the target isn't high-enough contrast or if the target distance isn't great enough. If it's a zoom lens, it can ask me to run the process twice, once at each end of the range. If it's a manual focus lens, it can throw up a 100% live view and ask me to focus it manually, then compare phase mode itself - a slower iterative process, but all still in-camera.

That's EXACTLY what I was thinking after my first time trying to do a calibration! What i didn't realize was that the live view contrast detection was perfect every time. So all my test shots looked the same I thought I was going crazy! That would be a 100% simple software addition to the firmware they could all do right now to fix the problem for sure!

I still wonder when the camera makers will build this into the body and truly automate it. If I put the camera on a tripod and aim it at an appropriate target, the camera can flip between phase and contrast as often as it wants (without my hands touching the camera and introducting vibration!) and calibrate itself. It can tell me if the target isn't high-enough contrast or if the target distance isn't great enough. If it's a zoom lens, it can ask me to run the process twice, once at each end of the range. If it's a manual focus lens, it can throw up a 100% live view and ask me to focus it manually, then compare phase mode itself - a slower iterative process, but all still in-camera.

I have also wondered this, it seems like a very easy solution.

Anyway I will be glad when contrast detect gets good enough that all this fine tune stuff and poor focus repeatability is over. Even after fine tuning, yesterday I shot 10 frames in low light of a static model at 1.4 with my D800E and just 2 were in focus.